1. Section 19, Article IV of the state constitution sets
salaries for state executive offices that were reasonable only
during the early years of statehood. These salaries have ceased
to be relevant. Section 27, Article V of the state constitution,
which allows the legislature to adjust the compensation of state
judicial and executive officers by statute, is the section of the
state constitution that has been followed in setting the salaries
of these officers. Section 27, Article V of the state
constitution will continue to be the controlling constitutional
provision for setting salaries of state judicial and
constitutional executive officers.

2. The repeal of Section 19, Article IV will modernize the
state constitution so there will be no confusion about the
compensation paid to executive officers.

3. The salary levels enumerated in Section 19, Article IV of
the state constitution, ranging from $1,000 for the state
treasurer to $3,000 for the governor, have been obsolete since
1907 when the Legislature first increased the constitutional
executive officer salaries.

4. As authorized by Section 27, Article V, the Legislature has
periodically adjusted salaries of state constitutional executive
officers as was reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances.
Therefore, repeal of Section 19, Article IV of the constitution
would have no effect on compensation of executive officers.

1. The state constitution should never be changed unless there
is a constitutional crisis. There is no such crisis. The fact
that certain provisions of the state constitution are obsolete is
no reason to repeal them. The constitution should retain the
history of the state's constitutional law and tradition within
the document itself.

2. Constitutional language must be precise, concise and
timeless so that it is flexible enough to allow adjustments by
statute. Instead of repealing Section 19, Article IV it would be
better to amend Section 19 to provide statutory authority to the
legislature to set the salaries of constitutional executive
officers. In that manner the requirement to be precise, concise
and timeless could be met.

3. The "law of unforeseen consequences" may arise if
Section 19, Article IV of the state constitution is repealed.
While much of the language contained in Section 19, Article IV of
the state constitution may be duplicated in subsequent statutes,
the effect of its absence from the state constitution may not be
apparent for many years. If Section 19 is repealed, there will be
no provision in Article IV of the state constitution for setting
salaries; and fees for constitutional executive offices. Article
IV is that portion of the constitution that prescribes the
fundamental structure of the executive branch of state
government. If Section 19, Article IV is repealed, constitutional
authority for setting executive officers' salaries and fees will
have to be taken from Section 27, Article V. Article V prescribes
the fundamental structure of the judicial branch of state
government. Constitutional authority should remain separate for
each branch of government.

4. The effect of deleting this constitutional provision is
unclear. In a 1946 case, the Idaho Supreme Court relied, in part,
upon Section 19, Article IV of the state constitution when it
ruled that the legislature may not change salaries of
constitutional executive officers during their term of office,
recognizing that the prohibition against such pay changes was
also contained in the same section of the constitution which
authorizes payment of salaries and fees to state executive
officers.